{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreife5zygdsqfvf76sfs5w3r3kwul64q7p2g6txjceztlxlh2her6hy",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:haakkg7y3xdghcdmprxeexso/app.bsky.feed.post/3mll4j2wslqt2"
  },
  "path": "/t/ai-as-a-centralizing-force/37309#post_10",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-11T08:59:40.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.privacyguides.net",
  "tags": [
    "Escaping an Anti-Human Future: A Conversation with Tristan Harris",
    "pgvector"
  ],
  "textContent": "Quoted from my other post.\n\nEscaping an Anti-Human Future: A Conversation with Tristan Harris\n\n> Escaping an Anti-Human Future: A Conversation with Tristan Harris\n>\n>> AI is maybe the worst thing humanity has ever invented\n>\n> I think a lot of these doomsayers saying AI is going to become the next Skynet are ridiculous. It’s like arguing a hammer wants to hit people. It’s just a tool. If AI is making certain industries redundant because it simply can do a better, more efficient and accurate job, then that is progression. Projects which claim “no AI contributions” for example, are not doing themselves any favors.\n>\n> The real fact is, that the contributions should not be distinguishable from human contributions on the basis that they are **accurate** and correct. Some projects refer to this as **thoughtful use** of AI. AI is particularly good at developing test cases, eg telling you all the things you’re not checking. This is useful for any kind of regression testing.\n>\n> As for “Ai being the replacement to search” - which was a quote from that video, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Some topics are not controversial and frankly with the way search engines been lately because of all the SEO garbage, I find that saves me a lot of time. Then you have the bloggers which have all sorts of interests and aren’t even writing factual information.\n>\n> The latest example I can think of was in regard to the arguments by a privacy blogger about Chrome including a weights file, and the particular blogger claiming that it was an environmental catastrophe (climate) based on preconceived usage of a data center’s power requirements, then pivoting and trying to claim that was a violation of GDPR. It literally amounted to an argument that local LLMs are worse for privacy, which makes no sense whatsoever in any context.\n>\n> Being able to input a specific error produced by a program and have it tell me why that is and and what to do about it, seems like a improvement over randomly trying to find some internet post on a forum where someone has had the same issue, or issue in a bugtracker. It also means i don’t have to visit a bunch of websites with consent dark patterns and annoying things that might trip up an adblocker.\n>\n> Then there are simply tasks a human cannot do efficiently, like analyze assembly or a binary like a fuzzy analysis on steroids. There are specific usecases like pgvector which use a small language model to improve database efficiency.\n>\n> It comes back to the old “garbage in, garbage out” if you put good data in and a lot of it, you get excellent results.\n\nPlease also be mindful we do have rules against unsubstantiated content that is not based on fact.",
  "title": "AI as a centralizing force"
}